Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?












2















Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?



What I mean by absolute power is: presumably they can make illegal or legal whatever they want. Even going so far as to disenfranchise their own electorate.



Is this correct, or are there any checks on the power of Parliament?






united-kingdom parliament







share|improve this question





























    2















    Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?



    What I mean by absolute power is: presumably they can make illegal or legal whatever they want. Even going so far as to disenfranchise their own electorate.



    Is this correct, or are there any checks on the power of Parliament?






    united-kingdom parliament







    share|improve this question



























      2












      2








      2








      Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?



      What I mean by absolute power is: presumably they can make illegal or legal whatever they want. Even going so far as to disenfranchise their own electorate.



      Is this correct, or are there any checks on the power of Parliament?






      united-kingdom parliament







      share|improve this question
















      Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?



      What I mean by absolute power is: presumably they can make illegal or legal whatever they want. Even going so far as to disenfranchise their own electorate.



      Is this correct, or are there any checks on the power of Parliament?






      united-kingdom parliament




      united-kingdom parliament






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 3 hours ago









      JJJ

      6,48522457




      6,48522457










      asked 4 hours ago









      BenBen

      3,2551539




      3,2551539






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3














          The Fixed-term Parliaments Act means they have to respond to the electorate, eventually. In fact this provision has existed for a long time in various forms




          The Septennial Act 1715 provided that a parliament expired seven years after it had been summoned; this period was reduced to five years by the Parliament Act 1911.




          The House of Lords can exercise some restraint in terms constitutionality of laws, although given the lack of a single, written constitution in the UK that's a complicated exercise.



          Presumably the Queen can withhold Royal Assent on some completely insane law, but there isn't much in the way recent precedent.




          The last bill that was refused assent by the sovereign (on the advice of ministers) was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.







          share|improve this answer





















          • 2





            Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

            – CoedRhyfelwr
            4 hours ago











          • @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago













          • I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

            – Ben
            4 hours ago













          • @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago






          • 1





            @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

            – origimbo
            4 hours ago



















          2














          Another elephant in the room here is the European Convention on Human Rights, an international convention to which the UK is a party state. This effectively gives a supranational body, the European Court of Human Rights the power to pass judgement that a contracting state has breached provisions in the convention concerning human civil and political rights.



          The original treaty does let states leave (denounce the treaty), but only after a 5 year cooling off period. As with all international treaties, it's not entirely clear what would happen if a state just unilaterally stopped playing ball immediately, especially if it were willing to enter a period of North Korean style isolationism, but it is another element in play, beyond the various parties (and the two houses) of Parliament watching each other.






          share|improve this answer
























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "475"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f40542%2fdoes-parliament-hold-absolute-power-in-the-uk%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            3














            The Fixed-term Parliaments Act means they have to respond to the electorate, eventually. In fact this provision has existed for a long time in various forms




            The Septennial Act 1715 provided that a parliament expired seven years after it had been summoned; this period was reduced to five years by the Parliament Act 1911.




            The House of Lords can exercise some restraint in terms constitutionality of laws, although given the lack of a single, written constitution in the UK that's a complicated exercise.



            Presumably the Queen can withhold Royal Assent on some completely insane law, but there isn't much in the way recent precedent.




            The last bill that was refused assent by the sovereign (on the advice of ministers) was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.







            share|improve this answer





















            • 2





              Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

              – CoedRhyfelwr
              4 hours ago











            • @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago













            • I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

              – Ben
              4 hours ago













            • @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago






            • 1





              @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

              – origimbo
              4 hours ago
















            3














            The Fixed-term Parliaments Act means they have to respond to the electorate, eventually. In fact this provision has existed for a long time in various forms




            The Septennial Act 1715 provided that a parliament expired seven years after it had been summoned; this period was reduced to five years by the Parliament Act 1911.




            The House of Lords can exercise some restraint in terms constitutionality of laws, although given the lack of a single, written constitution in the UK that's a complicated exercise.



            Presumably the Queen can withhold Royal Assent on some completely insane law, but there isn't much in the way recent precedent.




            The last bill that was refused assent by the sovereign (on the advice of ministers) was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.







            share|improve this answer





















            • 2





              Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

              – CoedRhyfelwr
              4 hours ago











            • @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago













            • I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

              – Ben
              4 hours ago













            • @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago






            • 1





              @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

              – origimbo
              4 hours ago














            3












            3








            3







            The Fixed-term Parliaments Act means they have to respond to the electorate, eventually. In fact this provision has existed for a long time in various forms




            The Septennial Act 1715 provided that a parliament expired seven years after it had been summoned; this period was reduced to five years by the Parliament Act 1911.




            The House of Lords can exercise some restraint in terms constitutionality of laws, although given the lack of a single, written constitution in the UK that's a complicated exercise.



            Presumably the Queen can withhold Royal Assent on some completely insane law, but there isn't much in the way recent precedent.




            The last bill that was refused assent by the sovereign (on the advice of ministers) was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.







            share|improve this answer















            The Fixed-term Parliaments Act means they have to respond to the electorate, eventually. In fact this provision has existed for a long time in various forms




            The Septennial Act 1715 provided that a parliament expired seven years after it had been summoned; this period was reduced to five years by the Parliament Act 1911.




            The House of Lords can exercise some restraint in terms constitutionality of laws, although given the lack of a single, written constitution in the UK that's a complicated exercise.



            Presumably the Queen can withhold Royal Assent on some completely insane law, but there isn't much in the way recent precedent.




            The last bill that was refused assent by the sovereign (on the advice of ministers) was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.








            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 4 hours ago

























            answered 4 hours ago









            FizzFizz

            15k23796




            15k23796








            • 2





              Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

              – CoedRhyfelwr
              4 hours ago











            • @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago













            • I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

              – Ben
              4 hours ago













            • @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago






            • 1





              @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

              – origimbo
              4 hours ago














            • 2





              Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

              – CoedRhyfelwr
              4 hours ago











            • @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago













            • I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

              – Ben
              4 hours ago













            • @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago






            • 1





              @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

              – origimbo
              4 hours ago








            2




            2





            Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

            – CoedRhyfelwr
            4 hours ago





            Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

            – CoedRhyfelwr
            4 hours ago













            @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago







            @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago















            I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

            – Ben
            4 hours ago







            I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

            – Ben
            4 hours ago















            @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago





            @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago




            1




            1





            @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

            – origimbo
            4 hours ago





            @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

            – origimbo
            4 hours ago











            2














            Another elephant in the room here is the European Convention on Human Rights, an international convention to which the UK is a party state. This effectively gives a supranational body, the European Court of Human Rights the power to pass judgement that a contracting state has breached provisions in the convention concerning human civil and political rights.



            The original treaty does let states leave (denounce the treaty), but only after a 5 year cooling off period. As with all international treaties, it's not entirely clear what would happen if a state just unilaterally stopped playing ball immediately, especially if it were willing to enter a period of North Korean style isolationism, but it is another element in play, beyond the various parties (and the two houses) of Parliament watching each other.






            share|improve this answer




























              2














              Another elephant in the room here is the European Convention on Human Rights, an international convention to which the UK is a party state. This effectively gives a supranational body, the European Court of Human Rights the power to pass judgement that a contracting state has breached provisions in the convention concerning human civil and political rights.



              The original treaty does let states leave (denounce the treaty), but only after a 5 year cooling off period. As with all international treaties, it's not entirely clear what would happen if a state just unilaterally stopped playing ball immediately, especially if it were willing to enter a period of North Korean style isolationism, but it is another element in play, beyond the various parties (and the two houses) of Parliament watching each other.






              share|improve this answer


























                2












                2








                2







                Another elephant in the room here is the European Convention on Human Rights, an international convention to which the UK is a party state. This effectively gives a supranational body, the European Court of Human Rights the power to pass judgement that a contracting state has breached provisions in the convention concerning human civil and political rights.



                The original treaty does let states leave (denounce the treaty), but only after a 5 year cooling off period. As with all international treaties, it's not entirely clear what would happen if a state just unilaterally stopped playing ball immediately, especially if it were willing to enter a period of North Korean style isolationism, but it is another element in play, beyond the various parties (and the two houses) of Parliament watching each other.






                share|improve this answer













                Another elephant in the room here is the European Convention on Human Rights, an international convention to which the UK is a party state. This effectively gives a supranational body, the European Court of Human Rights the power to pass judgement that a contracting state has breached provisions in the convention concerning human civil and political rights.



                The original treaty does let states leave (denounce the treaty), but only after a 5 year cooling off period. As with all international treaties, it's not entirely clear what would happen if a state just unilaterally stopped playing ball immediately, especially if it were willing to enter a period of North Korean style isolationism, but it is another element in play, beyond the various parties (and the two houses) of Parliament watching each other.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 3 hours ago









                origimboorigimbo

                13.8k23355




                13.8k23355






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid …



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f40542%2fdoes-parliament-hold-absolute-power-in-the-uk%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Why is a white electrical wire connected to 2 black wires?

                    Image
                    1 I just opened my ceiling light to replace it with another mount. I see a white wire connected to 2 black wires, is that right? The middle switch controls this ceiling light. electrical ceiling light share | improve this question asked 4 hours ago konyak konyak 108 4 New contributor konyak is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct. ...
                    Read more

                    Waikiki

                    Image
                    Denne artikkelen kan ha godt av ein språkvask , som reinskar opp målføringa og/eller innfører same språkstilen overalt. Denne artikkelen kan ha godt av ei opprydding for å nå ein høgare standard og/eller for å verta i tråd med standardoppsettet. Sjå korleis du redigerer ei side og stilmanualen for hjelp. Waikiki Land   USA Stat Hawaii Stad Honolulu Wikimedia Commons: Waikiki Utsyn over Waikiki Waikīkī er ein bydel i Honolulu, sør på øya Oahu, som er ei av Hawaii-øyane. Waikīkīstranda er ein av dei meste berømte strendene i verda. Waikīkī strekkjer seg langs stillehavskysten og har ei rekkje velrenommerte hotell. Bydelen er Hawaii-turismens høyborg. På Waikīkī Beach står ei statue av den lokale sportsstjerna Duka Kahanamoku. Kjelder | Denne artikkelen bygger på «Waikiki» frå Wikipedia på bokmål, den 4. november 2018. Denne artikkelen manglar kjelder eller referansar . Hjelp Wikipedia med å finna truverdige kjelder...
                    Read more

                    What are all the squawk codes?

                    Image
                    2 $begingroup$ I love aviation and I love learning new things about it. I was wondering if anyone knew all of the squawk codes and in particular what squawk 7500 means. squawk-codes share | improve this question edited 15 mins ago Jamiec ♦ 14.8k 4 60 91 asked 5 hours ago Zac Callaghan Zac Callaghan 11 2 New contributor Zac Callaghan is a new co...
                    Read more